View Full Version : Anyone else noticed a degradation in service ?
The Jackal
10-02-2007, 00:14
I guess Virgin Media doesn't know how to manage the ailing telewest / ntl cable network.
Since the switch over I've been suffering from bad and erratic pings
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=254 ttl=246 time=27.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=255 ttl=246 time=20.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=256 ttl=246 time=20.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=257 ttl=246 time=25.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=258 ttl=246 time=18.7 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=259 ttl=246 time=15.4 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=260 ttl=246 time=50.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=261 ttl=246 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=262 ttl=246 time=24.8 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=263 ttl=246 time=21.9 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=264 ttl=246 time=38
Thats just too eratic for comfort :mad:
Yep - my 10mb line is now >1.5mb :confused:
Noticed an average increase of 100ms to game servers, and seem to have lost 200k and 500k of upstream and downstream on my 4Mb.
allanprg
10-02-2007, 00:29
Nope my 2meg is still 2meg. Any time of day or night.
Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:30:06 GMT
1st 512K took 2359 ms = 217 KB/sec, approx 1788 Kbps, 1.75 Mbps
2nd 512K took 2031 ms = 252.1 KB/sec, approx 2077 Kbps, 2.03 Mbps
3rd 512K took 2172 ms = 235.7 KB/sec, approx 1942 Kbps, 1.9 Mbps
4th 512K took 2172 ms = 235.7 KB/sec, approx 1942 Kbps, 1.9 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1937 Kbps, 1.9 Mbps
The Jackal
10-02-2007, 00:31
Nope my 2meg is still 2meg. Any time of day or night.
Sat, 10 Feb 2007 00:30:06 GMT
1st 512K took 2359 ms = 217 KB/sec, approx 1788 Kbps, 1.75 Mbps
2nd 512K took 2031 ms = 252.1 KB/sec, approx 2077 Kbps, 2.03 Mbps
3rd 512K took 2172 ms = 235.7 KB/sec, approx 1942 Kbps, 1.9 Mbps
4th 512K took 2172 ms = 235.7 KB/sec, approx 1942 Kbps, 1.9 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 1937 Kbps, 1.9 Mbps
These figures are of jack s*** interest they mean nothing we all get 2meg 4meg or 10meg down but thats not an indication of overall performance.
What are your pings like ? Webpages should hit your screen INSTANTLY without lag. etc etc
Thats where I noticed the problem first... web pages are lagging big time when they used to be instant.
The Jackal
10-02-2007, 00:41
Thats where I noticed the problem first... web pages are lagging big time when they used to be instant.
Saw your post in the other thread and must say that we are not going to get a better deal by going elsewhere :(
RIP off Britain.
allanprg
10-02-2007, 00:45
Well i was downloading a large file at about 225-240kb. Websites were nearly instant. Most of them anycase.There were a few that took about 3 or 4 secs.
Toilet-Duck
10-02-2007, 13:56
I guess Virgin Media doesn't know how to manage the ailing telewest / ntl cable network.
Since the switch over I've been suffering from bad and erratic pings
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=254 ttl=246 time=27.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=255 ttl=246 time=20.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=256 ttl=246 time=20.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=257 ttl=246 time=25.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=258 ttl=246 time=18.7 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=259 ttl=246 time=15.4 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=260 ttl=246 time=50.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=261 ttl=246 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=262 ttl=246 time=24.8 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=263 ttl=246 time=21.9 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=264 ttl=246 time=38
Thats just too eratic for comfort :mad:
Getting the same problem here! I use to get stable pings of 15 and not more than 20... Now Im getting pings of 70 and below!
This is really ****ing me off, is it possible to report a fault to ntl even though my ping is 70 in games? It use to be a stable 15ms ping!
I guess Virgin Media doesn't know how to manage the ailing telewest / ntl cable network.
Since the switch over I've been suffering from bad and erratic pings
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=254 ttl=246 time=27.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=255 ttl=246 time=20.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=256 ttl=246 time=20.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=257 ttl=246 time=25.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=258 ttl=246 time=18.7 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=259 ttl=246 time=15.4 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=260 ttl=246 time=50.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=261 ttl=246 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=262 ttl=246 time=24.8 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=263 ttl=246 time=21.9 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=264 ttl=246 time=38
Thats just too eratic for comfort :mad:
I wouldn't exactly call those pings erratic or bad. Can you really tell the different between 15ms and 30ms? My guess is no.
I have ntl/virgin 2 MB - and in the evening it becomes veeeeeeeryyyyy slooow !
However in the afternoon it is good. What's going on ?
janipewter
10-02-2007, 14:42
****ing disappointed at my service as of late, used to get sustained 9.7Mbps on most downloads (from UK servers) and speedtests, now I get under 1Mbit speeds.
Phoned "Virgin Media" just now and Mohammed couldn't do **** to sort out the problem, of course my PC is the problem according to him, even though I know it isn't.
Modem activity light permanently on when nothing but router is connected to it = problem. But he refused to have it. ****ing ****.
Having absolutely no problems at all..Been fine since that last power cut about 2/3 months ago which knocked all my services off.
It's been perfect ever since.The only throttling I get is at individual websites that set limits for downloads from their sites.
Virgin media service can't help, if something is wrong the just blame computer, i called them many times and nothing useful was advised.
Can members please refrain from using abusive or inappropriate language (even with the swear filter), and/or attempting to bypass the swear filter.
This is a family-friendly forum.
no problems 2day so far
Sat, 10 Feb 2007 17:18:45 GMT
1st 512K took 591 ms = 866.3 KB/sec, approx 7138 Kbps, 6.97 Mbps
2nd 512K took 250 ms = 2048 KB/sec, approx 16876 Kbps, 16.48 Mbps
3rd 512K took 501 ms = 1022 KB/sec, approx 8421 Kbps, 8.22 Mbps
4th 512K took 431 ms = 1187.9 KB/sec, approx 9788 Kbps, 9.56 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 10556 Kbps, 10.31 Mbps
The internet usually slows in the evening - night .
Is that because the packets are tired? ;)
a couple of points:
Due to the fact that most of the routers with NTL and a lot of sites assign ICMP requests a low prority, pings are not necessarily an accurate measure of speed.
Second, people appear to be expecting changes in the service to happen instantly. They won't. Some of the upgrades required are massive, and won't happen overnight. I don't know whether Richard Branson will be able to change things for the better, but even if he does, it will take months (at least).
The ping times given do not indicate where the problem is, could be outside NTLs network.
BBC seems ok to me and doesn't seem to deprioritise (not cable):
Reply from 212.58.227.79: seq=0000 time=7.730ms TTL=246 ID=b48d
Reply from 212.58.227.79: seq=0001 time=7.462ms TTL=246 ID=b48e
Reply from 212.58.227.79: seq=0002 time=7.654ms TTL=246 ID=b48f
Reply from 212.58.227.79: seq=0003 time=7.809ms TTL=246 ID=b490
Statistics for 212.58.227.79:
Packets: sent=4, rcvd=4, error=0, lost=0 (0% loss) in 1.507838 sec
RTTs of replies in ms: min/avg/max: 7.462 / 7.663 / 7.809
Ok, as promised.
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=29ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=19ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=26ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=39ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=16ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=24ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=22ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=17ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=69ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=28ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=378ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=23ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=37ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=25ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=20ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=34ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=7ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=21ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=14ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=12ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=8ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=31ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=18ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=11ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=9ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=10ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=13ms TTL=254
Reply from 82.38.96.1: bytes=32 time=15ms TTL=254
Ping statistics for 82.38.96.1:
Packets: Sent = 745, Received = 745, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 7ms, Maximum = 378ms, Average = 13ms
Control-C
Not exactly erratic, looks pretty normal to me :)
hardtarget
10-02-2007, 21:19
well im on 10mb and here are my stats
http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/1801/untitledxx4.jpg
im in luton by the way
zachysat
10-02-2007, 21:43
same here on my 4 meg if do not improve will change provider same story we do better and you get the worst:mad: :mad:
the good thing about is there are other providers
zachysa:D
Exorcist74
10-02-2007, 22:06
I am on 4mb NTL and have seen in the last 15wks a deteriation of there service, i seem to loose half my connection for no apparent reason.... I thought 4mb was uncaped, but I think i am being capped, If this is going to be the norm, then I am going to look elsewear for a provider,its now 10:05pm and my signal is down to 241kb/sec, where it should be in the 400's, when I signed up with NTL back when it first started I did not sight for a capped service, I pay for a 4mb and I expect to get 4mb, not this half rated service...
anyone else notice this happening to them? Im in the Swansea Area.
http://www.dslzoneuk.net/speedtest/speedtest.php?id=432119
perfectly fine here on 4mb in manchester, pings stably at 20ms for uk places and 3.8mbit download :)
leedrummond
10-02-2007, 22:44
each time i do a test i get 3.5 mb not 4.0mb
Wicked_and_Crazy
10-02-2007, 22:45
I guess Virgin Media doesn't know how to manage the ailing telewest / ntl cable network.
Since the switch over I've been suffering from bad and erratic pings
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=254 ttl=246 time=27.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=255 ttl=246 time=20.1 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=256 ttl=246 time=20.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=257 ttl=246 time=25.5 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=258 ttl=246 time=18.7 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=259 ttl=246 time=15.4 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=260 ttl=246 time=50.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=261 ttl=246 time=17.6 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=262 ttl=246 time=24.8 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=263 ttl=246 time=21.9 ms
64 bytes from www9.rbsov.bbc.co.uk (212.58.227.79): icmp_seq=264 ttl=246 time=38
Thats just too eratic for comfort :mad:
Are you totally stupid, the company has changed name, they still have the same staff:rolleyes:
The Jackal
11-02-2007, 00:16
I wouldn't exactly call those pings erratic or bad. Can you really tell the different between 15ms and 30ms? My guess is no.
As per the other users comments I too at one point enjoyed average pings of around 15ms on an old 512K telewest service many years ago and was a lot happier with that 512K service than any service offered today simply due to the fluid latency of the service then.
Yes erratic pings do make a different lets take a webpage with 100 http request objects with an additional lag of 15ms implies that the page takes 1.5seconds longer to load than usual (MINIMUM) and to top that with the 100 such request there is a high likelyhood of a packet loss or a very high packet lag resulting in even more lag or even a timeout.
Illuminist
11-02-2007, 01:17
All these issues boil down to bad cable infrustructure, unfortunately. I've come to that conclusion along time ago sinse having no issues with my connection and indeed T.V. or Telephone.
...I get full speed day and night and no traffic shaping. ...God forbid if the same users here had ADSL to deal with - then they'd be moaning! ;)
well im on 10mb and here are my stats
http://img117.imageshack.us/img117/1801/untitledxx4.jpg
im in luton by the way
Im located in Hemel Hempstead and on Luton UBR.
http://www.speedtest.net/result/84965120.png
Its not just like this as its 07.20 on a Sunday morning, its always this fast and has been for nearly 3 yrs.
So no absolutely rock solid performance from the fab Virgin Media :D
janipewter
11-02-2007, 08:20
Have had a rock solid 9.7mbit up until this week, and now...
https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/02/112.png
Same Here! although mine has been like this for at least a month ago now, here are the results for my so called "10Mb" internet service....
============================================
Sun, 11 Feb 2007 13:13:34 UTC
1st 512K took 1328 ms = 385.5 KB/sec, approx 3177 Kbps, 3.1 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1328 ms = 385.5 KB/sec, approx 3177 Kbps, 3.1 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1172 ms = 436.9 KB/sec, approx 3600 Kbps, 3.52 Mbps
4th 512K took 1266 ms = 404.4 KB/sec, approx 3332 Kbps, 3.25 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 3322 Kbps, 3.24 Mbps
============================================
(http://www.speedtest.net])https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/local/2007/02/111.png
This is really starting to grind my gears now!!! I have been on the phone to NTL or Virgin Media as it is now called and no luck.... they are constantly reminding me that this is "up to 10mb" well even at midnight I can't evan get a 4mb service........ i don't know what else to do!
I'm on 4Mb broadband:
Sun, 11 Feb 2007 13:21:08 GMT
1st 512K took 1172 ms = 436.9 KB/sec, approx 3600 Kbps, 3.52 Mbps
2nd 512K took 1152 ms = 444.4 KB/sec, approx 3662 Kbps, 3.58 Mbps
3rd 512K took 1111 ms = 460.8 KB/sec, approx 3797 Kbps, 3.71 Mbps
4th 512K took 1092 ms = 468.9 KB/sec, approx 3864 Kbps, 3.77 Mbps
Overall Average Speed = approx 3731 Kbps, 3.64 Mbps
So, I'm happy with the speed. :)
As per the other users comments I too at one point enjoyed average pings of around 15ms on an old 512K telewest service many years ago and was a lot happier with that 512K service than any service offered today simply due to the fluid latency of the service then.
Yes erratic pings do make a different lets take a webpage with 100 http request objects with an additional lag of 15ms implies that the page takes 1.5seconds longer to load than usual (MINIMUM) and to top that with the 100 such request there is a high likelyhood of a packet loss or a very high packet lag resulting in even more lag or even a timeout.
First of all 100 HTPP requests are not one after the other they'll be done somewhat in parallel, for example Opera will do 8 at a time so your 100 requests will have an extra 200ms at most from an extra 15ms ping. That is only if pings are given same priority in the routers you go through, if they have a lower priority then the HTTP requests may not see any "extra" lag at all and could well be quicker than a ping request.
Having pings at 30ms is not going to cause packet loss nor a timeout, pings in the high hundreds of ms, eg 750+, will start packet loss and eventually timeouts (tho that is more seconds than ms).
To save you the trouble of bringing games into the ping equation, games dont use the traditional ping (ICMP) packets and so any high pings you see that are ICMP packets, doesnt mean your games will see ping spikes either
As per the other users comments I too at one point enjoyed average pings of around 15ms on an old 512K telewest service many years ago and was a lot happier with that 512K service than any service offered today simply due to the fluid latency of the service then.
Yes erratic pings do make a different lets take a webpage with 100 http request objects with an additional lag of 15ms implies that the page takes 1.5seconds longer to load than usual (MINIMUM) and to top that with the 100 such request there is a high likelyhood of a packet loss or a very high packet lag resulting in even more lag or even a timeout.
15 milliseconds = 0.015 seconds
Good math my friend. It doesn't really make a difference, really.
The Jackal
11-02-2007, 17:37
Nice can we have peoplr other than those who have not just freshly read the " Networking for dummies " book to provide some sensible and real answers ?
Cheers
Nice can we have peoplr other than those who have not just freshly read the " Networking for dummies " book to provide some sensible and real answers ?
Cheers
I was sensible in providing you with the real math.
The simple solution would be to go elsewhere if you're not happy with the 'erratic latency'.
CycoSymz
11-02-2007, 18:14
I'm only getting around 800K and I'm supposed to be on 4Meg.
CrC, maybe you should take time out and flick through "People Skills for dummies" and "How not to ask for help on forums For Dummies" ;) I'm sure they both come in "leet" speak with big pictures to clarify points.
MovedGoalPosts
11-02-2007, 18:22
OK, lets not get into personalities please
Unfortunately for Telewest, they can't blame the "internet" if you do a download from their own gamedemo server on their own network
http://gamefiles.virginmedia.com/blueyondergames/demos/
just start a couple of downloads and it will give you a very good idea of how rubbish their network has become - my 4mb - 480k is barely able to reach 12k at this moment - forget about the internet when you can't even transfer sensibly across you own isp's network!
Ok ok, I know the engineer has said that they know there is severe congestion and that they were aware of it back in Sept and that new kit has been ordered and that it should be fitted by the end of March etc etc. I know they have given me a free month but it doesn't alter the fact that a good company should ANTICIPATE demand, not leave customers with a non service.
In the same way that I couldn't give a toss if a water company gave me a rebate because they could only supply me with 1 pint of water per day - I NEED water and I also NEED a functioning net connection!
I will stick it out for a while and see if "the great toothy one" can improve things back to how it used to be but................. I also use the adsl I have had to get installed in the meantime (seems good btw with a solid 3 - 5mb available in the evenings)
getting back to the matter in hand, I think there must be some kind of QOS going on, as I said before my HTTP and/or FTP download speeds are pretty crap does not matter what time of the day it is, but why when I use "Usenet" service on a port 119 do i get speeds of about 800K/s to 1.2Mb/s which I wehat I would expect from a 10mbit service.... anyone?
Unfortunately for Telewest, they can't blame the "internet" if you do a download from their own gamedemo server on their own network
http://gamefiles.virginmedia.com/blueyondergames/demos/
just start a couple of downloads and it will give you a very good idea of how rubbish their network has become - my 4mb - 480k is barely able to reach 12k at this moment - forget about the internet when you can't even transfer sensibly across you own isp's network!
Ok ok, I know the engineer has said that they know there is severe congestion and that they were aware of it back in Sept and that new kit has been ordered and that it should be fitted by the end of March etc etc. I know they have given me a free month but it doesn't alter the fact that a good company should ANTICIPATE demand, not leave customers with a non service.
In the same way that I couldn't give a toss if a water company gave me a rebate because they could only supply me with 1 pint of water per day - I NEED water and I also NEED a functioning net connection!
I will stick it out for a while and see if "the great toothy one" can improve things back to how it used to be but................. I also use the adsl I have had to get installed in the meantime (seems good btw with a solid 3 - 5mb available in the evenings)
Just tried from the same site (I am on 4mb using Leeds proxy) averaging at 480kB.....
Finished d/l at 20:06 - 13-14 minutes for 461MB.
janipewter
11-02-2007, 19:59
Not bad. I'm on 10Mb:
Download Failed (1)
Not bad. I'm on 10Mb:
http://img258.imageshack.us/img258/2666/wtfsi6.png
lol, well i know there has been problems in oldham think affecting me as well pings are horrible speed is not slow but no where near normal so god knows probs fixed when oldham is fixed
As I said in my first thread I posted, I believe they are changing the UBR's for the upcoming Traffic Management where our "Unlimited" speeds will be halved during peak hours. Its in trial mode just now in parts of England, and techies dont like it if you know, great leverage on the phones (non Indians).
Redbull69
11-02-2007, 20:45
JANIPEWTER I'm in the same boat as you, 10Mb but getting <100Kb/s i have been told that it's a capacity problem and they are going to replace the Node. Trouble is this has been going on since Christmas. I work from home and trying to work with high volumes of Data through my work client is painful, when it gets to the point i can no longer do it i have to trek to the office which costs me £30 a day. My plight is little helped when they continue to delay the work. I'm in the kettering, Northamptonshire area for those close experiencing the same.
:mad:
a couple of points:
Due to the fact that most of the routers with NTL and a lot of sites assign ICMP requests a low prority, pings are not necessarily an accurate measure of speed.
Second, people appear to be expecting changes in the service to happen instantly. They won't. Some of the upgrades required are massive, and won't happen overnight. I don't know whether Richard Branson will be able to change things for the better, but even if he does, it will take months (at least).
Well said. RB may have a magic wand but Tinkerbell he is not.:D from what I gather the ntl side of the business will take some time to sort out.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.